...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Quarterly Journal of Forestry >Comparison of three tools for measuring tree diameter in stands of different age and stem size
【24h】

Comparison of three tools for measuring tree diameter in stands of different age and stem size

机译：三种测量不同年龄和树干尺寸林木直径的工具的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

We compared three tools (callipers, Biltmore stick and diameter tape) commonly used to measure diameter at breast height (dbh) in standing trees. Each tool works according to separate geometric relationships, operational limitations and sources of error. Two studies were devised to test each tool across a range of stand conditions. All plots in each study were measured repeatedly with each tool in a fully randomised experimental design. Individual tree diameters and time taken to measure each plot were recorded. Callipers returned consistently lower estimates of dbh compared with the other two tools across a range of tree sizes up to a mean dbh of least 55cm. Differences between tools increased with larger tree sizes. In stands with small average diameters, the maximum mean difference between the three tools was 4% of the calliper value, whereas in stands with larger diameter trees the corresponding difference was 8%. In terms of measurement times, the calliper and Biltmore stick were generally faster than the diameter tape. Where average dbh was approximately 50cm, the Biltmore stick was the fastest tool and nearly 50% faster than the diameter tape. The appeal of callipers is enhanced with the advent of affordable digital callipers and dedicatedsoftware, which streamlines data capture and analysis. However, the other two instruments are not without merit. Beyond the operational reach of callipers (commonly 65cm), the Biltmore stick may be useful where speed is a priority and the discrepancy between tools is not critical. The diameter tape is recommended where a measure that is more consistent with the callipers is required.
机译：我们比较了常用的三种工具（卡尺，Biltmore棍棒和直径尺）来测量站立树木的胸高（dbh）直径。每个工具均根据单独的几何关系，操作限制和错误源进行工作。进行了两项研究，以测试各种工作台条件下的每种工具。在完全随机的实验设计中，使用每种工具重复测量每个研究中的所有地块。记录各个树的直径和测量每个图所花费的时间。与其他两个工具相比，在范围至少为55cm的平均dbh范围内，卡尺返回的dbh估计值始终低于其他两个工具。树的大小越大，工具之间的差异越大。在具有较小平均直径的林分中，这三个工具之间的最大平均差异为卡尺值的4％，而在具有较大直径树的林分中，相应的差异为8％。就测量时间而言，卡尺和Biltmore棒通常比直尺更快。在平均dbh约为50厘米的地方，比尔特莫尔棒是最快的工具，比直径胶带快50％。负担得起的数字卡尺和专用软件的出现增强了卡尺的吸引力，该软件简化了数据捕获和分析。但是，其他两个工具也不是没有优点。除了游标卡尺的操作范围（通常为65厘米）以外，Biltmore摇杆在速度是优先事项而工具之间的差异不是至关重要的情况下可能会有用。如果需要与游标卡尺更一致的措施，建议使用直尺卷尺。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号